You can get the story here, and the district court opinion (which I haven't read) here. News via Dale Carpenter, who reports that the plaintiffs won on the "gay marriage = sex discrimination" argument, which up till now has had little success.
Obviously, on a purely personal level, I support this decision. I've long since passed the point where I believe that discriminatory treatment of gay and lesbian citizens is in any way justifiable or defensible under the constitution, and the more states fall in line with that consensus, the better. Politically, things are a little more interesting, but I'm still optimistic. Gay marriage was a big loser for Democrats in 2004. But the tide slowed in 2006, and Kos thinks that it will be a non-issue in 2008. Even if I'm still not convinced supporting gay marriage will be a net gain this coming cycle, I do know that it is a huge winner with younger voters, and one of the reasons they are flocking to the Democratic Party in droves. Even if they can squeeze a few more votes out of being the party of gay-bashing this coming year, every time the GOP dips into this well they dig themselves a deeper hole for the future.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
They've already stayed the judge's decision. :(
Also, I wrote a response to Romney's response to the original ruling that I posted in a queer blogging group. I won' repost it here... because it is not appropriate for a family blog like the Debate Link. ;)
Don't be a shrinking violet, Matt Cole.
I've always strongly supported the sex discrimination angle. Alas for the ERA falling short.
Post a Comment